On 10/22/2015 05:42 PM, Markus Zoeller wrote:
Tang Chen <tangc...@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote on 10/21/2015 10:22:15 AM:
From: Tang Chen <tangc...@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Date: 10/21/2015 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Migration state machine proposal.
Hi,
Please help to take a look at this problem. I was trying to raise it in
the spec discussion.
But since we don't need a spec on this problem, so I want to discuss it
here.
It is about what the new state machine will be.
http://paste.openstack.org/show/476954/
Thanks.
I'd like to make you aware of bp "split-different-live-migration-types":
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/225910/
It intends to split those 3 types you are talking about. This could have
some overlap to your work.
Hi Markus ,
Thank you for the info. Will look at it in detail.
And BTW, the direction came to this:
1. Keep the Migration.status field as it is now. This is because these
statuses
have been exposed through APIs. Just use Enum to ensure the values are
valid. And introduce a state machine for it. This is just a small
improvement.
2. The real improvement is here, will be in another BP. Introduce a new
Migration.state field, and a new state machine to fix the problems
in the
current implementation, I mean remove redundant statuses, and make
the state machine more reasonable.
Thanks.
Regards, Markus Zoeller (markus_z)
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
